In the first appeal, Morris v. Kasparek (In re Kasparek), 426 B.R. 332 (10th Cir. BAP 2010) (“Kasparek I”), another panel of this Court reversed the bankruptcy court’s order denying the Trustee’s request to sell real property held in joint tenancy by Debtor Jonathon Kasparek (“Debtor” or “Jonathon”), his brother James Kasparek (“James”), and his father, Wayne A. Kasparek (“Wayne”), holding the Trustee qualified as a bona fide purchaser under Kansas law and, therefore, held the Debtor’s interest in the property free of Wayne’s equitable interest.
However, because the bankruptcy court concluded the estate did not have an interest in the property, it did not address the issue of whether the property could be sold under 11 U.S.C. § 363(h), thus the matter was remanded to the bankruptcy court to make the requisite § 363(h) findings. Upon remand, the bankruptcy court issued its Order Resolving Adversary Action (the “Remand Order”), implicitly adopting this Court’s rulings regarding ownership and specifically making the § 363(h) findings. Wayne now appeals the Remand Order.
We conclude the doctrine of law of the case bars consideration of the merits of this appeal.
Affirmed.
*This unpublished opinion may be cited for its persuasive value, but is not precedential, except under the doctrines of law of the case, claim preclusion, and issue preclusion.